In the following conversation, which discussion technique does anna most clearly show? ramona: anna, where does the theme seem to change? anna: according the article: "the fault lies with the fda's inability to release enough information in order to regain the public's trust. but perhaps japan is to blame as well. although there are plans to remove the spent nuclear fuel rods and build a permafrost wall around the four damaged reactors, is this really enough to recover damaged trust? " and then sato goes on to explain this statement. a. challenging established ideas b. using evidence to support your conclusions c. synthesizing claims into a single conclusion d. asking clarifying questions

In this conversation, Ana explains certain public confidence, in which she does not ask any questions to substantiate her claim, the fourth option offered is excluded. She does not deny the existing ideas, because she only lists the facts in the article, which excludes the first option. She does not synthesize all the existing claims, since she alleges all the claims and possibilities with the same probability, and the third option is excluded. Anna simply lists all the evidence to support the claims and conclusions,

The answer is: B.

there is no picture just let me know what it is and i can you tho : ) mark me the brainliest ? have a good day

they are all talking about chocolate (next time you post a question with "which" post the choices too)